Loading this candidate’s profile from the FEC filings and campaign records.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Loading this candidate’s profile from the FEC filings and campaign records.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Candidates › OH-08 race › 2025–2026
D Democratic nominee for U.S. House, OH-08
Has not served in Congress
9 priorities from enochforcongress.com, in the order they are listed there. Every heading and the text under it is copied exactly, as one passage for each page it is from, and links to that place on the page; hover a source to see which passage it opens.
The United States Constitution is clear: the power to declare war belongs to Congress. This principle exists for a reason. War is the most serious decision a nation can make, and it must never be undertaken by a single person without the consent of the American people through their elected representatives.
The War Powers Resolution was created to reinforce this responsibility. It requires that the President consult Congress when introducing American forces into hostilities and obtain authorization if those operations continue. Our system was designed so that no president—regardless of party—could take the nation into war alone. (Constitution Center)
Yet today, the United States finds itself in a growing conflict with Iran without clear congressional authorization.
Already, American lives have been lost. Six U.S. service members were recently killed during operations connected to the conflict, a sobering reminder that the cost of war is always paid by our brave men and women in uniform and their families. (People.com)
Every American must ask a simple question: what is the objective, and what is the cost?
War does not happen in isolation. It risks drawing the United States deeper into a regional conflict, costing billions of dollars, destabilizing global security, and placing more American service members in harm’s way. Once a nation steps onto the path of war, it becomes increasingly difficult to step back.
This is exactly why the Constitution requires debate and authorization from Congress before committing the country to sustained military action.
Our troops deserve clarity about the mission they are asked to carry out. Our families deserve accountability for the decisions that could send their loved ones into combat. And the American people deserve a voice when the nation faces the possibility of a prolonged war.
Supporting our troops means more than honoring their sacrifice—it means ensuring that when we ask them to fight, it is for a mission that has been fully debated, lawfully authorized, and clearly justified.
War must never be entered lightly. The lives of our service members, the stability of our nation, and the future of our country demand nothing less.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/2026/03/08/war-requires-the-voice-of-the-people
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com at this heading)
On January 22, 1973, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the Fourteenth Amendment protects a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. This decision was a resounding victory for women’s rights, arguably the most important one since women earned the right to vote in 1920. Finally, women could receive reproductive care administered by competent providers, not just for abortions, but for fertility, miscarriage, and other reproductive needs. Gone were the days of so-called back-alley abortions, performed under unsafe conditions by unqualified practitioners who mercilessly exploited the fear and pain of young, desperate women.
That is, until June 24, 2022. On that fateful day, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Court issued a 6-3 judgment that reversed Roe v. Wade, once again relegating reproductive care to the back alleyway and turning the clock on women’s rights back nearly 50 years.
I am Vanessa Enoch, and I am challenging Warren Davidson to represent Ohio’s 8th District in the U.S. House of Representatives. I support reproductive rights for women, and Mr. Davidson does not, as evidenced by his numerous statements and lengthy voting record against reproductive freedom. He supported the OH Unborn Heartbeat Protection Amendment, commonly known as the heartbeat bill, which would have prohibited abortions after six weeks— before most women know they’re pregnant. He has earned a National Pro-Life Scorecard grade of A+ from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, whose mission is to end abortion by electing like-minded national leaders.
Davidson is the co-sponsor for a national abortion ban, the Life at Conception Act, which would eliminate reproductive freedom for all women in every state and “implement equal protection for the right to life of each born and preborn human person,” where “person” includes embryos. Should this bill ever become law, in-vitro fertilization (IVF), which brings the joy of parenthood to thousands of infertile couples (86,146 infants born in the U.S in 2021 were IVF babies), would be illegal, and the bill would gut funding for contraception.
Like me, the majority of Ohio voters support reproductive rights for women. This became clear last November, when the voters approved Issue 1 by a wide margin (57-43), making reproductive rights part of the Ohio Constitution and superseding the misguided, unpopular heartbeat law.
If you give me the honor of representing you in Congress, I will fight every day for a woman’s right to safe, accessible, and affordable reproductive care.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/2024/08/01/i-will-fight-every-day-for-a-womans-right-to-safe-accessible-and-affordable-reproductive-care
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com at this heading)
“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” At the time this was written, there was no national army, because people were afraid such an army would usurp the authority of the states. The objective of the second amendment was to allow the existence of militias, to ensure this did not happen. It had nothing to do with individual gun ownership for other purposes.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com
We do not have or need an amendment for every right we enjoy as Americans. We have a right to own a home, live anywhere in the country we choose, buy a car, go to the movies…the list goes on. And we have all those rights without a constitutional amendment. Why do we need an amendment for the right to own a gun?
Something else to consider: at the time the second amendment was written, the most advanced gun was able to fire one bullet at a time, three times per minute (depending on how fast the shooter could reload), and the bullet velocity was one-third of that reached with today’s weapons. (Can you hear the founders rolling over in their graves?)
Gun violence is not only a tragedy in America, it’s a national embarrassment. No other wealthy country has this problem. Others who experienced a mass shooting took legislative action immediately, and have had few if any mass shootings since. This includes the UK, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. After their tragedy in 2019, it took New Zealand six weeks (!!) to ban assault rifles. In response to recent tragedies here in the US, Canada has banned assault rifles, and they will soon freeze sales of handguns. Canada has about 30 guns per capita, one-fourth of the US number. The number of mass shootings in the US so far this year? Over 200. In Canada? Zero.
Yet Republicans continue to assert that the right to own a gun, even ones designed for the battlefield, to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible, is more important than our right to go to school, or work, or the movies, or a shopping mall, or a nightclub, without fear of being shot. The massacre of first graders at Sandy Hook didn’t convince them that assault rifles and high-capacity magazines are not needed for self-defense, shooting sports, or hunting. The murder of 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde did not persuade them that a background check before buying a gun is a good idea, including at a gun show, and there should be no expiration after three days (the Charleston loophole). The killing of four people at a Tulsa hospital by a man unhappy with his surgeon because his back still hurt did not convince them that gun manufacturers should not be exempt from lawsuits and that it’s not OK for these manufacturers to market assault rifles to young men by appealing to their masculinity. Ten people buying groceries in Buffalo were murdered by a racist who traveled 200 miles to commit his evil act, yet Republicans still think it’s OK to buy untraceable ghost guns online, the boyfriend loophole is just fine, and like all of the above, requiring child locks on guns would be a step down a slippery slope.
Their proposed fixes would be laughable if the situation weren’t tragic. Lock the school doors. Arm the teachers. Really? That makes it safe to be able to buy military-grade guns and hardware, even 18-year-olds? After Sandy Hook, NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre said, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Actually, no. It didn’t work in Buffalo. Or Uvalde. According to an FBI report, citizens killed active shooters in only four out of 345 incidents from 2000 to 2019, and none of those was in an educational setting. Republican lawmakers know that the goal should be to prevent bad guys from having a gun in the first place, but they’re too deep into the pockets of the NRA to admit it.
And Davidson is one of them. He never met a gun rights bill he didn’t like, or a common sense gun control bill he could support. He and his colleagues have blood on their hands from Sandy Hook, Buffalo, Uvalde, Tulsa, and so many more, and we need to remind voters of it early and often.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/2022/09/11/gun-violence-is-a-tragedy-in-america-and-a-national-embarrassment
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com at this heading)
Every person has inherent dignity and deserves to live in a safe, stable home. Where we live should not determine our life’s trajectory. When we ensure that good places to live exist in every neighborhood—rural, suburban and urban—we honor people’s dignity and strengthen our entire region.
The cost of homes has been allowed to outpace local incomes because of zoning laws, tax incentives and lending practices that favor some neighborhoods over others. Decades of redlining, disinvestment and exclusionary policies have concentrated poverty in certain zip codes. These structural choices, not individual failings, drive disparities in home ownership, housing quality and neighborhood resources.
We can change course by rewriting land‑use rules, investing in mixed‑income developments, and ensuring that teachers, nurses and firefighters can live near their workplaces. By engaging residents in planning thoughtfully designed neighborhoods—with good schools, transportation, parks and healthy food options—we create vibrant communities that boost physical, mental and economic wellbeing. When everyone has access to good places to live, our region’s prosperity grows and children have the stability they need to learn and thrive.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/issue/homes-and-communities-as-foundations-for-wellbeing
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com at this heading)
Technology is transforming how we live, work, and grow our economy. As a candidate for public office—and as someone who owns and manages a technology and management company—I’ve seen how powerful innovation can be when it is guided by responsibility.
The United States must continue to lead in technological advancement. Our innovators are developing tools that strengthen healthcare, national security, and economic opportunity. But progress must be matched with accountability.
New technologies—from artificial intelligence to modern digital infrastructure—should be developed carefully and ethically. Innovation must protect privacy, strengthen cybersecurity, and create opportunities for American workers.
As technology expands—especially data centers and digital infrastructure—we must also protect our communities by responsibly managing power, water, and energy resources while safeguarding the data Americans rely on every day.
America can lead the world in innovation, but we must move forward wisely. Responsible innovation ensures technological progress strengthens our communities, our economy, and our future.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/issue/advancing-technology-responsibly
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com at this heading)
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com at this heading)
I support responsible gun laws that protect both constitutional rights and public safety. As Americans, we have a right to lawful gun ownership, but we also have a responsibility to ensure our communities, schools, and families are safe.
I believe we can respect the Second Amendment while advancing practical, common-sense measures that help reduce gun violence, prevent tragedies, and keep weapons out of the hands of individuals who pose a danger to themselves or others. Responsible policies such as safe storage practices, stronger enforcement against illegal gun trafficking, and thorough background checks are reasonable steps that protect lives without infringing on the rights of responsible gun owners.
Gun violence is impacting communities across our nation, including children, families, law enforcement officers, and everyday citizens. We must move beyond political division and focus on solutions rooted in accountability, prevention, mental health support, community investment, and public safety.
Protecting lives and protecting rights should not be mutually exclusive. We can—and must—do both.
I support Ethan’s Law because no child should lose their life due to an unsecured firearm. Responsible gun ownership and protecting our children are not opposing values—they go hand in hand. Ethan’s Law promotes safe firearm storage practices that help prevent accidental shootings, youth suicides, and unauthorized access to guns by children.
As a mother, community leader, and advocate for public safety, I believe we have a responsibility to pursue practical, common-sense solutions that save lives while respecting constitutional rights. Secure storage requirements are a reasonable step toward reducing preventable tragedies and creating safer homes and communities.
Far too many families have experienced unimaginable pain because a firearm was left accessible to a child. We can honor those lives by taking meaningful action to ensure firearms are stored responsibly. Protecting children should never be a partisan issue—it is a moral obligation.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/issue/responsible-gun-ownership
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com/issue ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com/issue at this heading)
Imagine a region where every family can afford good food, health care and a safe place to live—where no child’s ZIP code or family background determines their destiny. Our economy isn’t an uncontrollable force of nature; it is something we design. Because it is designed, we can redesign it so that its rules and incentives promote stability and wellbeing for all.
Right now, costs are rising faster than wages. Health‑care and housing policies, corporate pricing practices and outdated labor rules have created barriers that keep workers from sharing in the prosperity they help create. For example, when health‑care companies can raise prices without oversight and wages remain flat, the bricks needed to build personal wellbeing—adequate health care, stable housing, education and secure jobs—crumble.
We can redesign these systems. By negotiating prescription‑drug prices, expanding access to preventive care, raising the minimum wage and investing in education and child care, we shore up the materials that build wellbeing. These changes will allow families to spend less on basic expenses and more on savings, education and small businesses—benefiting the entire region. Together, through innovative policy and collective effort, we can build a future of shared prosperity.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/issue/a-secure-and-prosperous-future
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com/issue ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com/issue at this heading)
Democracy and markets work best when they are fair, transparent and inclusive. Our current political and economic systems were built by people, and we can redesign them to ensure that they serve the common good.
Many Americans worry that a powerful few use their influence to rig policies to benefit themselves at the expense of regular people. Distrust in government and the economy flourishes when campaign finance loopholes, opaque lobbying rules and weak enforcement allow corruption to fester. This isn’t an indictment of individuals; it’s evidence that our systems need repair.
To restore trust, we can strengthen rules that limit money in politics, require transparency in lobbying and enforce ethical standards. We should design economic policies that reward work over speculation, incentivize local investment and prevent monopolistic practices. When people see that the rules are fair and that everyone’s voice counts, they are more likely to engage constructively in solving our shared challenges. Through ingenuity and collective action, we can reclaim our democracy and build an economy that reflects our shared values.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/issue/restoring-trust-and-integrity-in-our-democracy-and-economy
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com/issue ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com/issue at this heading)
Everyone deserves the opportunity to pursue meaningful work and contribute to our shared prosperity. Our region’s economic vitality depends on a diverse workforce that reflects all of our communities.
The decline in job security and wage growth stems from policy decisions—such as weakened labor protections, uneven education funding and underinvestment in infrastructure and childcare—that have tilted the playing field. When people’s ability to build wellbeing depends on precarious jobs and unpredictable schedules, it’s not because they lack drive; it’s because the system is failing to provide the supports they need.
We can redesign our economy to work for everyone by raising wages, ensuring predictable hours, investing in apprenticeship and training programs, expanding child care and transportation options, and supporting small businesses and innovation. These policies recognize that building wellbeing is a community project—it takes a construction crew, not just individual effort. When we invest in workers and the conditions that allow them to thrive, we all benefit through stronger local economies, healthier families and a more resilient future.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · enochforcongress.com/issue/reimagining-work-and-opportunity
Heading as listed on enochforcongress.com/issue/reimagining-work-and-opportunity ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com/issue/reimagining-work-and-opportunity at this heading) · “Reimagining work and opportunity” on enochforcongress.com ↗ (opens enochforcongress.com at this heading)
FEC filings, Apr 1, 2026 to Oct 14, 2026 · Official FEC bulk data · committee C00667279
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 40 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $9.4K.
The 2 largest committees by total given are listed. In all, 2 committee contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $1.5K. Counted from the givers' own filings, which can run above the total the campaign itself reports.
Total reported receipts $112,635
Every dollar the committee reported receiving this cycle, split by the source the FEC filing attributes it to. Open a source marked + to see who gave. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
Loading the map
Tap or hover over a state, or focus the map and use the arrow keys, to read its total. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom.
90% of the money placed by state came from inside Ohio: $8.4K of $9.4K.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 36 contributions · 90% | $8,418 |
| 1 contribution · 5.3% | $500 |
| 1 contribution · 2.7% | $250 |
| 2 contributions · 2.2% | $206 |
By the state each donor wrote on the filing, across 4 states and territories. Donors who have given $200 or less this cycle are not itemized, so they cannot be placed on a map. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total.
Money groups spent on their own, not through a campaign. Each ad is filed against the candidate it names, so money attacking an opponent shows on the opponent’s row. Open a candidate to see who spent it.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 1 payment · 61% of all spending | $6,500 |
| 1 payment · 21% of all spending | $2,251 |
| 1 payment · 16% of all spending | $1,698 |
| 1 payment · 11% of all spending | $1,175 |
| 10 payments · 11% of all spending | $1,144 |
| 1 payment · 9.7% of all spending | $1,024 |
| 4 payments · 8.8% of all spending | $935 |
| 4 payments · 5.4% of all spending | $570 |
The people, firms and committees paid the most, across every kind of payment. Each share is of everything the committee reported spending this cycle, not only the itemized payments above. A payee that is itself a committee links to its own profile.
63 endorsers listed on Vanessa Enoch’s own campaign site: 6 parties, 1 official, 31 unions, 25 organizations.
This is the campaign's claim, checked by an editor against its page; the endorsers have not confirmed it to us. Each name opens the campaign’s page with that name highlighted.
US Senator , Canary Candidate
Advanced · 33,454 votes (75%) · 1 of 2 · Full results ↗
Election not held yet · Full results ↗
Every contest for this seat that named this candidate, most recent last; a result is shown once the race is called. Election dates and results from civicAPI (civicapi.org). civicAPI aggregates results from Secretaries of State and equivalent election bodies, and makes its own race calls. civicapi.org ↗
The FEC counts someone as a candidate once they raise or spend more than $5,000.
Official FEC filing record for the current cycle. The priorities they publish are quoted from their own site, in their order.
Statements are quoted from these pages exactly. Headings, order and wording are the campaign’s; the record marking is ours.
| Employer as filed |
|---|
| Amount |
|---|
| 4 contributions · 27% of ranked | $2,450 |
| Written instead of an employer · 11 contributions · 27% of ranked | $2,433 |
| 1 contribution · 11% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 1 contribution · 8.2% of ranked | $750 |
| 1 contribution · 5.5% of ranked | $500 |
| 1 contribution · 5.5% of ranked | $500 |
| 1 contribution · 5.5% of ranked | $500 |
| Written instead of an employer · 1 contribution · 3.3% of ranked | $300 |
A further $236 came from donors whose answer names no employer (None, blank), so it is not ranked. Itemized gifts over $200, grouped by the words donors filed: not an industry classification, and a gift from an employee is not a gift from the employer. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($37,485) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an occupation · 5 contributions · 48% of ranked | $933 |
| 1 contribution · 38% of ranked | $750 |
| 1 contribution · 7.6% of ranked | $150 |
| 2 contributions · 2.5% of ranked | $50 |
| 1 contribution · 2.5% of ranked | $50 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 1 contribution · 1.5% of ranked | $30 |
A further $7,411 came from donors whose answer names no occupation (blank), so it is not ranked. Itemized gifts over $200, grouped by the words donors filed: not an industry classification, and a gift from an employee is not a gift from the employer. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($37,485) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $21,807
Every itemized payment the committee reported this cycle, sorted by what it said each one was for. The categories are ours; the wording they are matched against is the committee’s own. Open a category to read the filed descriptions and who was paid. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
All 116 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.